MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016348254 · doi:10.1097/ans.0b013e31828077eb

Barriers to Mental Health Care

2013· article· en· W2016348254 on OpenAlexafffund
Patricia Lingley‐Pottie, Patrick J. McGrath, Pantelis Andreou

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsBeatrice Hunter Cancer Research InstituteNova Scotia Health AuthorityCapital District Health Authority
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyScale (ratio)PsychologyMedicineMental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment barriers have prompted the development of new models of care. Distance delivery systems bridge the access gap, increasing service availability. Understanding differences between systems can inform system improvements. Sixty participants from the Strongest Families telephone intervention for child behavior difficulties participated. Participants completed a questionnaire to explore differences in perceived treatment barriers (Treatment Barriers Index-TBI) and therapeutic processes (eg, therapeutic alliance, self-disclosure, health outcome) between face-to-face versus distance treatment. The TBI scale has strong internal reliability (Cronbach α: 0.95 [face-to-face]; 0.90 [distance]). Statistically significant differences were found between delivery system TBI mean scores, indicating fewer barriers with distance treatment. Therapeutic process differences between delivery modes suggest enhanced therapeutic alliance and self-disclosure scores with distance treatment. Increased access, convenience, and sense of privacy (visual anonymity) offered by a distance delivery system may provide an enhanced experience for some individuals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.435 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Nursing ScienceSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207